Catholic Info
Traditional Catholic Faith => Crisis in the Church => The Feeneyism Ghetto => Topic started by: curiouscatholic23 on October 08, 2011, 01:15:38 AM
-
I once posted this question on fisheaters once and everybody laughed at me but its really serious.
I am 22, I go to the traditional latin mass, and I am a sedevacantist. I was raised in the novus ordo and as I got older I drifted away just like most adolescents do in that false religion. Then one day when I was 18/19 I picked up a King James Bible given to me by lutheran friends for my NO first communion. The Jesus Christ that I read about in the bible was radically different than the one presented to me in the bogus ordo. After a lot of research on Vatican II and Fatima I got more traditional and came to the situation I am in today. Almost all from reading and internet research. I really think its a special grace I even believe what I believe.
My religion is starting to distance me more from my family and "friends." For example, not eating meat on Fridays, is something a lot of my family and friends find unusual.
One thing I am really struggling with right now is the Dogma Outside the Church There is No Salavation. I accept it 100% but its still hard and brings me a lot of despair considering that 100% of my old "friends" are not traditional catholics. I have friends who live in scandulous relationships, I have friends who are divorced and re-married, I have friends who use contraception, I have friends who like to drink and get drunk on the weekends, I have friends who are mormons, protestant heretics, muslims, agnostics, etc. etc. etc. I met all these friends before I converted to the true faith, and it seems impossible I can just ignore them now for the rest of my life. I must also admit that my lifestyle before I converted and even after I converted was scandulous as well. Particuarly going to the bars with these friends and drinking and hanging out in horrible nightclubs with loose women. Right now I go to bars but I try to be extremely cautious because I know they can very easily turn into an occasion of sin.
My depression also involves my family too, who have been victims of the novus ordo. Most of my family right now, by traditional catholic standards, would probably go to hell if they died right now for mortal sins like fornication, drunkeness, and contraception. Because nobody in the bogus ordo goes to confession, most of these sins will never be confessed. This is really hard for me to swallow considering I love these people being that they are my family, and obviously I do not want them to go to hell.
Im having a hard time waking up every morning dealing with the fact that the elect is so small. Sometimes I consider making my own website and productions like MHFM warning people about the dangerous path they are on and what the end result will be. I have also considered going door to door like mormons and jehovas witnesses. I dont care anymore, I want to see as many people as possible convert to the one true faith. Every soul is precious to God. I have also considered that maybe my true vocation is just to go door to door, write to newspapers, and set up websites informing people that Outside The Church There Is No Salvation. I really think I lack the holiness and spiritual discipline to be a priest, and I desire marriage, but this is more important. Thoughts??? Is this despair/depression about hell for those around me a genuine call or sign to do something good? Or is it the devil trying to get me to go crazy and seriously depressed???
When I read Our Lady of Fatima by William Thomas Walsh I recall that young Jacinta was also very depressed about WW2 that was going to happen, and all the souls that would fall into hell. Sometimes I feel that same sorrow.
-
I have this desire to preach to everyone I see about the true catholic religion, vatican II, and sedevacantism.
Right now I am unemployed, but this desire could get me fired in the workplace. For example, lets say I am in the corporate world and my boss is a contracepting protestant heretic like the majority of america. What if I told him one day, "hey Boss, I like you as a person but I gotta tell you something for your own good: you are in a false religion and you are on the road to hell."
If I said that I would get fired ASAP and I could never keep a job in this economy. So what am I supposed to do, keep my mouth shut and hide from the truth??
-
I once posted this question on fisheaters once and everybody laughed at me but its really serious.
I am 22, I go to the traditional latin mass, and I am a sedevacantist. I was raised in the novus ordo and as I got older I drifted away just like most adolescents do in that false religion. Then one day when I was 18/19 I picked up a King James Bible given to me by lutheran friends for my NO first communion. The Jesus Christ that I read about in the bible was radically different than the one presented to me in the bogus ordo. After a lot of research on Vatican II and Fatima I got more traditional and came to the situation I am in today. Almost all from reading and internet research. I really think its a special grace I even believe what I believe.
My religion is starting to distance me more from my family and "friends." For example, not eating meat on Fridays, is something a lot of my family and friends find unusual.
One thing I am really struggling with right now is the Dogma Outside the Church There is No Salavation. I accept it 100% but its still hard and brings me a lot of despair considering that 100% of my old "friends" are not traditional catholics. I have friends who live in scandulous relationships, I have friends who are divorced and re-married, I have friends who use contraception, I have friends who like to drink and get drunk on the weekends, I have friends who are mormons, protestant heretics, muslims, agnostics, etc. etc. etc. I met all these friends before I converted to the true faith, and it seems impossible I can just ignore them now for the rest of my life. I must also admit that my lifestyle before I converted and even after I converted was scandulous as well. Particuarly going to the bars with these friends and drinking and hanging out in horrible nightclubs with loose women. Right now I go to bars but I try to be extremely cautious because I know they can very easily turn into an occasion of sin.
My depression also involves my family too, who have been victims of the novus ordo. Most of my family right now, by traditional catholic standards, would probably go to hell if they died right now for mortal sins like fornication, drunkeness, and contraception. Because nobody in the bogus ordo goes to confession, most of these sins will never be confessed. This is really hard for me to swallow considering I love these people being that they are my family, and obviously I do not want them to go to hell.
Im having a hard time waking up every morning dealing with the fact that the elect is so small. Sometimes I consider making my own website and productions like MHFM warning people about the dangerous path they are on and what the end result will be. I have also considered going door to door like mormons and jehovas witnesses. I dont care anymore, I want to see as many people as possible convert to the one true faith. Every soul is precious to God. I have also considered that maybe my true vocation is just to go door to door, write to newspapers, and set up websites informing people that Outside The Church There Is No Salvation. I really think I lack the holiness and spiritual discipline to be a priest, and I desire marriage, but this is more important. Thoughts??? Is this despair/depression about hell for those around me a genuine call or sign to do something good? Or is it the devil trying to get me to go crazy and seriously depressed???
When I read Our Lady of Fatima by William Thomas Walsh I recall that young Jacinta was also very depressed about WW2 that was going to happen, and all the souls that would fall into hell. Sometimes I feel that same sorrow.
This is something I struggle with. I hear people say there is no salvation outside of the Catholic Church, but when you think about it that probably means that 80% of the world has no chance of salvation. And of the remaining 20%, only a certain percentage of those will achieve salvation. This is why I am uncertain of any dogma that preaches there is no salvation outside the Catholic Church. Isn't it possible that a Protestant could repent of his/her sins and not go to hell for any repented Mortal Sin? They just wouldn't be reconciled with Jesus Christ because they don't have the Eucharist. They might go to Purgatory in order to be reconciled with Jesus Christ after being purged by flame. Just some thoughts.
-
The greatest of Saints were converts,
A good number of martyrs were converts,
The first Christians in any society are converts.
What you describe is just normal. Marriage crisis, employment crisis, loss of social privilages and family support is bread and butter of conversion. (learns idioms!).
-
..... I am uncertain of any dogma that preaches there is no salvation outside the Catholic Church.
You doubt a dogma of the Church?
-
Infinitefaith, salvation has nothing to do with numbers. God is not obliged to save a certain number of people. Those who obey him will be saved, be they 98% of the world or just 2 or 3 individuals.
For example: God says:"Thou shall not kill." and it doesn't matter whether the number of murderers is small or large.
It is the people's fault if they don't enter the church. The other thing to keep in mind is that faith always leads to action. The way you believe affects your life. So those who believe in false religion will do things that the false religion wants. So they are to be lost even if salvation could be found outside the church.
-
This is something I struggle with. I hear people say there is no salvation outside of the Catholic Church, but when you think about it that probably means that 80% of the world has no chance of salvation. And of the remaining 20%, only a certain percentage of those will achieve salvation. This is why I am uncertain of any dogma that preaches there is no salvation outside the Catholic Church. Isn't it possible that a Protestant could repent of his/her sins and not go to hell for any repented Mortal Sin? They just wouldn't be reconciled with Jesus Christ because they don't have the Eucharist. They might go to Purgatory in order to be reconciled with Jesus Christ after being purged by flame. Just some thoughts.
Do you find it difficult to believe that all but 8 humans died in the Great Flood because they chose not to get in the Ark?
-
I have this desire to preach to everyone I see about the true catholic religion, vatican II, and sedevacantism.
Right now I am unemployed, but this desire could get me fired in the workplace. For example, lets say I am in the corporate world and my boss is a contracepting protestant heretic like the majority of america. What if I told him one day, "hey Boss, I like you as a person but I gotta tell you something for your own good: you are in a false religion and you are on the road to hell."
If I said that I would get fired ASAP and I could never keep a job in this economy. So what am I supposed to do, keep my mouth shut and hide from the truth??
Simple. You shut up about it. As you said before, you already got friends and relatives to worry about who are on the highway to hell. Why are you concerning yourself with this stranger?
Personally, I'll say something if someone is publicly out of line (being obscene etc.), but generally I keep admonishments regulated to my friends (who are non-catholic), and only those that I know well enough to where they know I'm telling them out of love and not because I need to preach. I recommend you try and do the same.
-
..... I am uncertain of any dogma that preaches there is no salvation outside the Catholic Church.
You doubt a dogma of the Church?
Id have to see it for myself before coming to any conclusions.
-
This is something I struggle with. I hear people say there is no salvation outside of the Catholic Church, but when you think about it that probably means that 80% of the world has no chance of salvation. And of the remaining 20%, only a certain percentage of those will achieve salvation. This is why I am uncertain of any dogma that preaches there is no salvation outside the Catholic Church. Isn't it possible that a Protestant could repent of his/her sins and not go to hell for any repented Mortal Sin? They just wouldn't be reconciled with Jesus Christ because they don't have the Eucharist. They might go to Purgatory in order to be reconciled with Jesus Christ after being purged by flame. Just some thoughts.
Do you find it difficult to believe that all but 8 humans died in the Great Flood because they chose not to get in the Ark?
Good Point. But they did not go to Hell right away.
-
..... I am uncertain of any dogma that preaches there is no salvation outside the Catholic Church.
You doubt a dogma of the Church?
Id have to see it for myself before coming to any conclusions.
So you can't state that you adhere with docility to all Dogmas of the Catholic Church?
You must see them all first, to decide for yourself if they are true?
-
Do you find it difficult to believe that all but 8 humans died in the Great Flood because they chose not to get in the Ark?
Good Point. But they did not go to Hell right away.
Isn't the usual saying, all who were outside the ark perished. When that's said it's not merely meant the body, but also the soul.
-
..... I am uncertain of any dogma that preaches there is no salvation outside the Catholic Church.
You doubt a dogma of the Church?
Id have to see it for myself before coming to any conclusions.
EENS is a dogma of the Church. Exactly what it means as well as how it works out in individual cases is not. Most Catholics, historical and currently, have accepted this dogma without concluding that everyone who is not explicitly a Catholic at death necessarily goes to Hell. God is perfectly just and perfectly merciful and more than capable of working it our.
-
Novus Ordo Catholics can go to Heaven. Unfortunetly though, because they are involved in a watered-down version of the Faith alot of them will be in sin. But they can still be saved. If, however, they know the TLM is the superior Mass yet reject it anyway, they cannot be saved unless they repent.
This is something I struggle with. I hear people say there is no salvation outside of the Catholic Church, but when you think about it that probably means that 80% of the world has no chance of salvation. And of the remaining 20%, only a certain percentage of those will achieve salvation. This is why I am uncertain of any dogma that preaches there is no salvation outside the Catholic Church. Isn't it possible that a Protestant could repent of his/her sins and not go to hell for any repented Mortal Sin? They just wouldn't be reconciled with Jesus Christ because they don't have the Eucharist. They might go to Purgatory in order to be reconciled with Jesus Christ after being purged by flame. Just some thoughts.
Christ said many times in the Bible that very few people make it to Heaven. So that being the case, why would it be hard to comprehend that most people don't go to Heaven?
-
"WHOEVER WILL CALL ON THE NAME OF THE LORD WILL BE SAVED." Romans 10:13
For judgment without mercy to him that hath not done mercy. And mercy exalteth itself above judgment. James 2:13
Bishop Williamson in a sermon on you tube clearly indicates that the flood caused many people to be saved because as they were dying they called out to God for mercy.
-
"WHOEVER WILL CALL ON THE NAME OF THE LORD WILL BE SAVED." Romans 10:13
For judgment without mercy to him that hath not done mercy. And mercy exalteth itself above judgment. James 2:13
Bishop Williamson in a sermon on you tube clearly indicates that the flood caused many people to be saved because as they were dying they called out to God for mercy.
Very good point! Disregard my previous post.
-
To the OP, I will pray for you, I feel God has chosen you for special graces....it is amazing to me that a 22 yr old, raised in the NO, could come to see the light of Tradition and want to cling to it as strongly as you want to! That is a sure sign that God has chosen you!
I discovered the True Faith in 1977 when I was 17...and I remember the "horror days" of the early Traditional mvmt, when NOs told us we were "sinning" and when TLM's were nearly impossibly to find outside of rented motel banquet rooms.
When you look back on your life and how you discovered Tradition, you may as I did, see so many times when God worked miracles in your life to lead you to where you are now. I sometimes wonder, if, when I decided to investigate the Church after relatives had told me what it "used to be like", I had met up with a modernist priest in my local NO parish instead of the diehard traditional priest I met, would my path have been different? (he was firmly trad but stayed with the NO out of a misguided sense of obedience. Nevertheless he was right where he needed to be, for me....and maybe that was Gods plan all along.) I left shortly after receiving instructions, one on one, from him, because I had found a TLM in a local motel room.
I will pray for your family too...another area where God blessed me is that He enabled me to be certain that both my parents went to Heaven.
My father was an unbaptized Jew who in his later years came to believe very strongly that Jesus Christ is the Messiah, and on his deathbed, after discussing the Faith with him, I was able to baptize him (he died a few hours later.)
My mother had been a Catholic before V2, but left. The good Lord arranged it so that she was in hospice care in my house before she died. I was able to call a priest to my home, who gave her the Sacrament of Extreme Unction on Palm Sunday of all days....she had become unconscious by the time Father got here, and I did not learn until later that when an unconscious Catholic receives Extreme Unction, and then dies before regaining consciousness, they go straight to Heaven. God worked the finest details out so perfectly, so I was able to have these comforts.
Looking back, I see the Hand of God in ALL of my life, and it amazes me. I don't understand what I merited to have these graces. I will pray for you, that God will do the same for you. I think He has already begun, however. :)
-
Part of your problem is that you interpret EENS in a Feeneyite/ absolutist way.
It is possible for non-Catholics to be saved not because of their false religion but in spite of it, though that path is perilous and rare.
Your job is to be a good example, pray for these people, and be available to gently nudge them in the direction of truth. Sledgehammer methods of constantly calling them out to their face only builds resentment and they write you off. So sometimes the best course is that less is more.
Salvation is up to God. You can point out objective things they are doing wrong, but the subjective elements are to be judged by God. I'd concentrate on fulfilling your own obligations and leave these people to God's Divine Judgment.
-
Part of your problem is that you interpret EENS in a Feeneyite/ absolutist way.
It is possible for non-Catholics to be saved not because of their false religion but in spite of it, though that path is perilous and rare.
Your job is to be a good example, pray for these people, and be available to gently nudge them in the direction of truth. Sledgehammer methods of constantly calling them out to their face only builds resentment and they write you off. So sometimes the best course is that less is more.
Salvation is up to God. You can point out objective things they are doing wrong, but the subjective elements are to be judged by God. I'd concentrate on fulfilling your own obligations and leave these people to God's Divine Judgment.
Maybe your right about my Feeneyite/absolutist way. The reason I am this way is because I just purchased the MHFM complete $20 package with all their videos and books. One of the books is called "Outside The Catholic Church There is Absolutely No Salvation."
He makes some very interesting points. But yet I have talked to traditonal clergy and they disagree with MFHM so I really do not know who to believe.
Another thing I am really struggling with is NFP. Pius XII said it was ok under certain serious circuмstances, but MHFM argues that is a heretical position and you will go to hell for it.
Im really confused and this is causing me a lot of anxiety.
-
..... I am uncertain of any dogma that preaches there is no salvation outside the Catholic Church.
You doubt a dogma of the Church?
Id have to see it for myself before coming to any conclusions.
So you can't state that you adhere with docility to all Dogmas of the Catholic Church?
You must see them all first, to decide for yourself if they are true?
I would have to see something for myself because I don't just take anyones word for it. You could be making a false statement yourself for all i know.
-
"WHOEVER WILL CALL ON THE NAME OF THE LORD WILL BE SAVED." Romans 10:13
For judgment without mercy to him that hath not done mercy. And mercy exalteth itself above judgment. James 2:13
Bishop Williamson in a sermon on you tube clearly indicates that the flood caused many people to be saved because as they were dying they called out to God for mercy.
What does romans 10:13 mean to you?
-
"WHOEVER WILL CALL ON THE NAME OF THE LORD WILL BE SAVED." Romans 10:13
For judgment without mercy to him that hath not done mercy. And mercy exalteth itself above judgment. James 2:13
Bishop Williamson in a sermon on you tube clearly indicates that the flood caused many people to be saved because as they were dying they called out to God for mercy.
What does romans 10:13 mean to you?
Private message sent
-
CuriousCatholic,
Do you have a Traditional Catholic priest whom you can talk to about the issues that you bring up here? If you don't currently have one, begin now to find one.
I believe you have mentioned before that you are not living near a Traditional Mass and Sacraments center. If that is correct, could you possibly take this time to travel to an area where you could be close to the Mass and where you could either find a job opr learn some skills that would help you to find employment? I realize that may be a luxury that is beyond your current state, being unemployed, but at least to put some kind of plan into action in that regard.
Also, I discussed this thread with a young man about your age who is a Traditional Catholic and asked him what he would tell you. He suggested that I ask you if you know about http://tradcircle.ning.com/ He tells me that there are lots of young Tradtional Catholics there who may be able to either give you some advice with what you're dealing with, or at least you could find some other young Traditional Catholic folks for some good friendship.
Lastly, but rather this is always first: Pray your Rosary every day and never skip your 3 Hail Marys every morning and every night. Read True Devotion to Jesus through Mary by St. Louis Marie de Montfort, and grow in your devotion to your heavenly Mother. Pray to her often for the grace of perseverance in the Faith.
God bless you.
-
Part of your problem is that you interpret EENS in a Feeneyite/ absolutist way.
It is possible for non-Catholics to be saved not because of their false religion but in spite of it, though that path is perilous and rare.
Your job is to be a good example, pray for these people, and be available to gently nudge them in the direction of truth. Sledgehammer methods of constantly calling them out to their face only builds resentment and they write you off. So sometimes the best course is that less is more.
Salvation is up to God. You can point out objective things they are doing wrong, but the subjective elements are to be judged by God. I'd concentrate on fulfilling your own obligations and leave these people to God's Divine Judgment.
Exactly!
-
I once posted this question on fisheaters once and everybody laughed at me but its really serious.
My religion is starting to distance me more from my family and "friends." For example, not eating meat on Fridays, is something a lot of my family and friends find unusual.
Yes, as a faithful Catholic, it is a sad occurrence that you'll soon find that you have less and less in common with friends and family - your interests are unique or weird and they have no interest whatsoever in what is important to you, as such, becoming distant, even disowning them because of the faith is often necessary. That's just the way it is.
Mat. 10:36 And a man's enemies shall be they of his own household. He that loveth father or mother more than me, is not worthy of me; and he that loveth son or daughter more than me, is not worthy of me
Luke 12:51Think ye, that I am come to give peace on earth? I tell you, no; but separation. For there shall be from henceforth five in one house divided: three against two, and two against three. The father shall be divided against the son, and the son against his father, the mother against the daughter, and the daughter against the mother, the mother in law against her daughter in law, and the daughter in law against her mother in law.
As for the No Salvation dogma, concern yourself with your own salvation - be very, very selfish in this regard and do whatever it is you need to do for *you* to persevere till the end. Beyond that, there is only so much you can do, mostly pray and do penance for the conversion of poor sinners, that's what Our blessed Mother told us to do. Almost 100 years ago Our Lady showed souls falling into hell like snow flakes in a blizzard to the Fatima children - for me the most difficult part of that to accept is that they all chose their eternity, yet I accept that because that's how it is.
If you discover that you have a calling to be a priest, God's will be done! Other than that, we must be prudent. As lay folk, we should not be telling anyone they will go to hell - we can say they commit mortal sin by contraception, carousing etc - but even then, there is a time and a place for everything and one must be prudent in their dealings with others.
As for MHFM, be very cautious there. They have some good stuff, same as some NOers - Michael Voris comes to mind - but IMO, finding a good trad priest for your spiritual adviser will be a huge source of consolation - seek one out.
-
Part of your problem is that you interpret EENS in a Feeneyite/ absolutist way.
It is possible for non-Catholics to be saved not because of their false religion but in spite of it, though that path is perilous and rare.
Your job is to be a good example, pray for these people, and be available to gently nudge them in the direction of truth. Sledgehammer methods of constantly calling them out to their face only builds resentment and they write you off. So sometimes the best course is that less is more.
Salvation is up to God. You can point out objective things they are doing wrong, but the subjective elements are to be judged by God. I'd concentrate on fulfilling your own obligations and leave these people to God's Divine Judgment.
Exactly!
I second that exactly! :)
-
Part of your problem is that you interpret EENS in a Feeneyite/ absolutist way.
It is possible for non-Catholics to be saved not because of their false religion but in spite of it, though that path is perilous and rare.
Your job is to be a good example, pray for these people, and be available to gently nudge them in the direction of truth. Sledgehammer methods of constantly calling them out to their face only builds resentment and they write you off. So sometimes the best course is that less is more.
Salvation is up to God. You can point out objective things they are doing wrong, but the subjective elements are to be judged by God. I'd concentrate on fulfilling your own obligations and leave these people to God's Divine Judgment.
This is a blatant heresy, one that is the root of the current apostasy.
I'm surprised that no one is speaking up against this post.
-
Probably because everyone knows what he means. The "non-Catholics" he refers to are Catholics by desire.
-
Part of your problem is that you interpret EENS in a Feeneyite/ absolutist way.
It is possible for non-Catholics to be saved not because of their false religion but in spite of it, though that path is perilous and rare.
Your job is to be a good example, pray for these people, and be available to gently nudge them in the direction of truth. Sledgehammer methods of constantly calling them out to their face only builds resentment and they write you off. So sometimes the best course is that less is more.
Salvation is up to God. You can point out objective things they are doing wrong, but the subjective elements are to be judged by God. I'd concentrate on fulfilling your own obligations and leave these people to God's Divine Judgment.
This is a blatant heresy, one that is the root of the current apostasy.
I'm surprised that no one is speaking up against this post.
I completely agree with you but anymore it's a waste of time and energy arguing it when almost everyone believes that heresy to be a dogma.
Quite amazing when you stop to think about that.
-
"WHOEVER WILL CALL ON THE NAME OF THE LORD WILL BE SAVED." Romans 10:13
For judgment without mercy to him that hath not done mercy. And mercy exalteth itself above judgment. James 2:13
Bishop Williamson in a sermon on you tube clearly indicates that the flood caused many people to be saved because as they were dying they called out to God for mercy.
This perfectly agrees with Haydock's commentary on 1 Peter 1:19,20
19 In which also coming he preached to those spirits that were in prison:
20 Which had been some time incredulous, when they waited for the patience of God in the days of Noe, when the ark was a building: wherein a few, that is, eight souls, were saved by water.
In which (to wit, soul or spirit) also he came, and preached to those spirits who were in prison. The true and common interpretation of this place seems to be, that the soul of Christ, after the separation from the body and before the resurrection, descended to a place in the interior parts of the earth, called hell in that which we call the apostles' creed, (sometimes called Abraham's bosom, sometimes Limbus Patrum, a place where were detained all the souls of the patriarchs, prophets, and just men, as it were in prison) and preached to these spirits in this prison; i.e. brought them this happy news, that he who was their Redeemer was now come to be their deliverer, and that at his glorious ascension they should enter with him into heaven, where none could enter before our Redeemer, who opened as it were heaven's gates. Among these were many who had been formerly at first incredulous in the time of Noe, who would not take warning from his preparing and building the ark, but it may be reasonably supposed that many of them repented of their sins when they saw the danger approaching, and before they perished by the waters of the deluge, so that they died at least not guilty of eternal damnation; because, though they were sinners, yet they worshipped the true God, for we do not find any proofs of idolatry before the deluge. These then, and all the souls of the just, Christ descended to free from their captivity, from their prison, and to lead them at his ascension triumphant with him into heaven.
-
Part of your problem is that you interpret EENS in a Feeneyite/ absolutist way.
It is possible for non-Catholics to be saved not because of their false religion but in spite of it, though that path is perilous and rare.
Your job is to be a good example, pray for these people, and be available to gently nudge them in the direction of truth. Sledgehammer methods of constantly calling them out to their face only builds resentment and they write you off. So sometimes the best course is that less is more.
Salvation is up to God. You can point out objective things they are doing wrong, but the subjective elements are to be judged by God. I'd concentrate on fulfilling your own obligations and leave these people to God's Divine Judgment.
This is a blatant heresy, one that is the root of the current apostasy.
I'm surprised that no one is speaking up against this post.
I completely agree with you but anymore it's a waste of time and energy arguing it when almost everyone believes that heresy to be a dogma.
Quite amazing when you stop to think about that.
What stevusmagnus says is absolutely true. EENS is often misinterpreted. Fr. Feeney was excommunicated because of his narrow and rigorist interpretation. I personally hold onto hope many more are saved than not.
-
Part of your problem is that you interpret EENS in a Feeneyite/ absolutist way.
It is possible for non-Catholics to be saved not because of their false religion but in spite of it, though that path is perilous and rare.
Your job is to be a good example, pray for these people, and be available to gently nudge them in the direction of truth. Sledgehammer methods of constantly calling them out to their face only builds resentment and they write you off. So sometimes the best course is that less is more.
Salvation is up to God. You can point out objective things they are doing wrong, but the subjective elements are to be judged by God. I'd concentrate on fulfilling your own obligations and leave these people to God's Divine Judgment.
This is a blatant heresy, one that is the root of the current apostasy.
I'm surprised that no one is speaking up against this post.
I completely agree with you but anymore it's a waste of time and energy arguing it when almost everyone believes that heresy to be a dogma.
Quite amazing when you stop to think about that.
What stevusmagnus says is absolutely true. EENS is often misinterpreted. Fr. Feeney was excommunicated because of his narrow and rigorist interpretation. I personally hold onto hope many more are saved than not.
Prove it.
-
Part of your problem is that you interpret EENS in a Feeneyite/ absolutist way.
It is possible for non-Catholics to be saved not because of their false religion but in spite of it, though that path is perilous and rare.
Your job is to be a good example, pray for these people, and be available to gently nudge them in the direction of truth. Sledgehammer methods of constantly calling them out to their face only builds resentment and they write you off. So sometimes the best course is that less is more.
Salvation is up to God. You can point out objective things they are doing wrong, but the subjective elements are to be judged by God. I'd concentrate on fulfilling your own obligations and leave these people to God's Divine Judgment.
This is a blatant heresy, one that is the root of the current apostasy.
I'm surprised that no one is speaking up against this post.
I completely agree with you but anymore it's a waste of time and energy arguing it when almost everyone believes that heresy to be a dogma.
Quite amazing when you stop to think about that.
What stevusmagnus says is absolutely true. EENS is often misinterpreted. Fr. Feeney was excommunicated because of his narrow and rigorist interpretation. I personally hold onto hope many more are saved than not.
Prove it.
http://www.the-pope.com/feeneyite.html
This rapidly stirred up a reaction, and in April of 1949, Dr. Maluf and three other professors, all members of the St. Benedict Center, were expelled from the Jesuit house in Boston for having taught an erroneous doctrine. They claimed that all those who were not explicitly members of the visible Church were damned, and accused all those who denied this of being heretics.
In order to explain the reasons to the press, the Very Reverend William L. Keheler, S.J., President of Boston College, declared: "They persisted in teaching, both in and outside the classroom, doctrines which contradicted the traditional teaching of the Catholic Church, ideas that fostered fanaticism and intolerance."
The affair became a scandal when on April 17, 1949, Father Leonard Feeney publicly undertook the defense of these professors and their doctrine.
The following day, Richard J. Cushing, the Archbishop of Boston, without any warning to the interested parties, declared to the press that Father Leonard Feeney was suspended a divinis, in the archdiocese and the St. Benedict's Center was placed under interdict.
Considering this double sanction to be against canon law, Father Feeney appealed to Rome. From then on, there was open war bewteen the priest and local authorities.
On the 8th of August, 1949, Cardinal Marchetti-Selvaggiani, Secretary of the Holy Office, wrote to the Archbishop of Boston and sent him a Declaration of this Holy Office to be conveyed to Father Feeney, which made clear the sense in which one should understand the doctrine that "There is no salvation outside of the Catholic Church." Father Feeney refused to adhere to this declaration and wrote with regard to the matter that "it can be considered as having established a two-sided policy in order to propagate error."
On October 28, Father Feeney was expelled from the Jesuit Order.
Things remained unchanged until September 14, 1952. At this point, the Archbishop of Boston demanded that Father Feeney retract his false interpretation and make an "explicit profession of submission" to the Roman Declaration within one month or suffer the penalty of being reduced to the state of a layman.
Father Feeney, accompanied by four witnesses, presented himself before his Archbishop. He told him that his only option was to declare the letter of Marchetti-Selvaggiani "absolutely scandalous because it was frankly heretical." Then he asked His Excellency if he was in agreement with the views expressed by the Roman Declaration. He obtained the following response: "I am not a theologian. All that I know is what I am told." Then, in the presence of these witnesses, Father Feeney accused the Archbishop of failing to perform his duty, and left.
On September 24, 1952, a letter was sent from the St. Benedict Center to Pius XII, accusing the Archbishop of Boston of heresy.
In October of 1952, Cardinal Pizzardo summoned Father Feeney to present himself in Rome for a hearing by the Holy Office. Father Feeney accepted on condition that they told him beforehand what the charges against him were. Not receiving any response, he did not comply.
On February 16, 1953, the Acta Apostolicae Sedis announced the excommunication of Father Leonard Feeney. The following is an official translation of the Decree:
"Since Father Leonard Feeney remained in Boston (St. Benedict Center) and since he has been suspended from performing his priestly duties for a long time because of his grave disobedience to the Authority of the Church, in no way moved by repeated warnings and threats of incurring excommunication ipso facto, and has still failed to submit, the most Eminent and Reverend Fathers, charged with the responsibility of safeguarding faith and morals, during a plenary session held on February 4, 1953, have declared him excommunicated with all the effects that this has in law.
"On Thursday, February 12, 1953, Our Most Holy Father Pius XII, Pope by Divine Providence, has approved and confirmed the decree of these Most Eminent Fathers, and ordered that this be made a matter of public record.
"Given in Rome in the general quarters of the Holy Office, February 13, 1953. Marius Crovini, notary."
-
Part of your problem is that you interpret EENS in a Feeneyite/ absolutist way.
It is possible for non-Catholics to be saved not because of their false religion but in spite of it, though that path is perilous and rare.
Your job is to be a good example, pray for these people, and be available to gently nudge them in the direction of truth. Sledgehammer methods of constantly calling them out to their face only builds resentment and they write you off. So sometimes the best course is that less is more.
Salvation is up to God. You can point out objective things they are doing wrong, but the subjective elements are to be judged by God. I'd concentrate on fulfilling your own obligations and leave these people to God's Divine Judgment.
This is a blatant heresy, one that is the root of the current apostasy.
I'm surprised that no one is speaking up against this post.
I completely agree with you but anymore it's a waste of time and energy arguing it when almost everyone believes that heresy to be a dogma.
Quite amazing when you stop to think about that.
What stevusmagnus says is absolutely true. EENS is often misinterpreted. Fr. Feeney was excommunicated because of his narrow and rigorist interpretation. I personally hold onto hope many more are saved than not.
Prove it.
I'm sure most of you know that Father Feeney was NOT excommunicated for his "narrow and rigorist interpretation." He was excommunicated for disobendience to the Holy See.
His excommunication was lifted before he died, and he never recanted a single word of No Salvation Outside the Church.
http://traditionalromancatholicism.org/FatherFeeneywasaloyalcatholic.html
This information is available on many sites.
-
Part of your problem is that you interpret EENS in a Feeneyite/ absolutist way.
It is possible for non-Catholics to be saved not because of their false religion but in spite of it, though that path is perilous and rare.
Your job is to be a good example, pray for these people, and be available to gently nudge them in the direction of truth. Sledgehammer methods of constantly calling them out to their face only builds resentment and they write you off. So sometimes the best course is that less is more.
Salvation is up to God. You can point out objective things they are doing wrong, but the subjective elements are to be judged by God. I'd concentrate on fulfilling your own obligations and leave these people to God's Divine Judgment.
This is a blatant heresy, one that is the root of the current apostasy.
I'm surprised that no one is speaking up against this post.
I completely agree with you but anymore it's a waste of time and energy arguing it when almost everyone believes that heresy to be a dogma.
Quite amazing when you stop to think about that.
What stevusmagnus says is absolutely true. EENS is often misinterpreted. Fr. Feeney was excommunicated because of his narrow and rigorist interpretation. I personally hold onto hope many more are saved than not.
Prove it.
I'm sure most of you know that Father Feeney was NOT excommunicated for his "narrow and rigorist interpretation." He was excommunicated for disobendience to the Holy See.
His excommunication was lifted before he died, and he never recanted a single word of No Salvation Outside the Church.
http://traditionalromancatholicism.org/FatherFeeneywasaloyalcatholic.html
This information is available on many sites.
I am fully aware that Fr. Feeney later recanted and before he died his excommunication was lifted. I even cede that his disobedience was the reason he was excommunicated. However his "narrow and rigorist" interpretation (only those who are baptized and are in full communion with the Catholic Church can hope for eternal salvation) is erroneous and has been vehemently condemned by the Church. I also fully admit that those who are not in full communion stand a far greater chance of being eternally lost owing to the fact that they do no enjoy the full benefits and graces of us who are so blessed to be members of Christ's one true Church.
http://www.the-pope.com/feeneyite.html
Declaration Letter to Archbishop Cushing from the Holy Office
THE SUPREME SACRED CONGREGATION OF THE HOLY OFFICE
From the Headquarters of the Holy Office
August 8, 1949
Protocol Number 122/49
Your Excellency:
This Supreme Sacred Congregation has followed very attentively the rise and the course of the grave controversy stirred up by certain associates of "St. Benedict Center" and "Boston College" in regard to the interpretation of that axiom : "Outside the Church there is no salvation."
After having examined all the docuмents that are necessary or useful in this matter, among them information from your Chancery, as well as appeals and reports in which the associates of "St. Benedict Center" explain their opinions and complaints, and also many other docuмents pertinent to the controversy, officially collected, the same Sacred Congregation is convinced that the unfortunate controversy arose from the fact that the axiom: "outside the Church there is no salvation," was not correctly understood and weighed, and that the same controversy was rendered more bitter by serious disturbance of discipline arising from the fact that some of the associates of the institutes mentioned above refused reverence and obedience to legitimate authorities.
Accordingly, the Most Eminent and Most Reverend Cardinals of this Supreme Congregation, in a plenary session, held on Wednesday, July 27, 1949, decreed, and the August Pontiff in an audience on the following Thursday, July 28, 1949, deigned to give his approval, that the following explanations pertinent to the doctrine, and also that invitations and exhortations relevant to discipline be given:
We are bound by divine and Catholic faith to believe all those things which are contained in the word of God, whether it be Scripture or Tradition, and are proposed by the Church to be believed as divinely revealed, not only through solemn judgement but also through the ordinary and universal teaching office (Denziger, n. 1792).
Now, among those things which the Church has always preached and will never cease to preach is contained also that infallible statement by which we are taught that there is no salvation outside the Church.
However, this dogma must be understood in that sense in which the Church herself understands it. For, it was not to private judgments that Our Saviour gave for explanation those things that are contained in the deposit of faith, but to the teaching authority of the Church.
Now, in the first place, the Church teaches that in this matter there is question of a most strict command of Jesus Christ. For He explicitly enjoined on his apostles to teach all nations to observe all things whatsoever He Himself had commanded (Matt., 28:19-20).Now, among the commandments of Christ, that one holds not the least place, by which we are commanded to be incorporated by Baptism into the Mystical Body of Christ, which is the Church, and to remain united to Christ and to His Vicar, through whom He Himself in a visible manner governs the Church on earth.
Therefore, no one will be saved who, knowing the Church to have been divinely established by Christ, nevertheless refuses to submit to the Church or withholds obedience from the Roman Pontiff, the Vicar of Christ on earth.
Not only did the Savior command that all nations should enter the Church, but He also decreed the Church to be a means of salvation, without which no one can enter the kingdom of eternal glory.
In His infinite mercy God has willed that the effects, necessary for one to be saved, of those helps to salvation which are directed toward man's final end, not by intrinsic necessity, but only by divine institution, can also be obtained in certain circuмstances when those helps are used only in desire and longing. This we see clearly stated in the Sacred Council of Trent, both in reference to the Sacrament of Regeneration and in reference to the Sacraments of Penance (Denziger, nn. 797, 807).
The same in its own degree must be asserted of the Church, in as far as she is the general help to salvation. Therefore, that one may obtain eternal salvation, it is not always required that he be incorporated into the Church actually as a member, but it is necessary that at least he be united to her by desire and longing.
However, this desire need not always be explicit, as it is in catechumens; but when a person is involved in invincible ignorance, God accepts also an implicit desire, so called because it is included in that good disposition of soul whereby a person wishes his will to be conformed to the will of God.
These things are clearly taught in that dogmatic letter which was issued by the Sovereign Pontiff, Pope Pius XII, on June 29, 1943, "On the Mystical Body of Jesus Christ." (AAS, Vol. 35, an. 1943, p. 193 ff.) For in this letter the Sovereign Pontiff clearly distinguishes between those who are actually incorporated into the Church as members, and those who are united to the Church only by desire.
Discussing the members of which the Mystical Body is composed here on earth, the same August Pontiff says: "Actually only those are to be included as members of the Church who have been baptized and profess the true faith, and who have not been so unfortunate as to separate themselves from the unity of the Body, or been excluded by legitimate authority for grave faults committed."
Toward the end of this same Encyclical Letter, when most affectionately inviting to unity those who do not belong to the body of the Catholic Church, he mentions those who "are related to the Mystical Body of the Redeemer by a certain unconscious yearning and desire," and these he by no means excludes from eternal salvation, but on the other hand states that they are in a condition " in which they cannot be sure of their salvation" since "they still remain deprived of those many heavenly gifts and helps which can only be enjoyed in the Catholic Church" (AAS, loc. cit., 342)
With these wise words he reproves both those who exclude from eternal salvation all united to the Church only by implicit desire, and those who falsely assert that men can be saved equally well in every religion (cf. Pope Pius IX, Allocution "Singulari quadam," in Denziger, nn. 1641, ff. - also Pope Pius IX in the Encyclical Letter "Quanto conficiamur mœrore" in Denzinger, n. 1677).
But it must not be thought that any kind of desire of entering the Church suffices that one may be saved. It is necessary that the desire by which one is related to the Church be animated by perfect charity. Nor can an implicit desire produce its effect, unless a person has supernatural faith: "For he who comes to God must believe that God exists and is a rewarder of those who seek Him" (Hebrews, 11:6). The Council of Trent declares (Session VI, chap. 8): "Faith is the beginning of man's salvation, the foundation and root of all justification, without which it is impossible to please God and attain to fellowship of His children" (Denz., n. 801)
From what has been said it is evident that those things which are proposed in the periodical "From the Housetops," fascicle 3, as the genuine teaching of the Catholic Church are far from being such and are very harmful both to those within the Church and those without.
From these declarations which pertain to doctrine certain conclusions follow which regard discipline and conduct, and which cannot be unknown to those who vigorously defend the necessity by which all are bound of belonging to the true Church and of submitting to the authority of the Roman Pontiff and of the Bishops "whom the Holy Ghost has placed . . . to rule the Church" (Act, 20:28)
Hence, one cannot understand how the St. Benedict Center can consistently claim to be a Catholic school and wish to be accounted such, and yet not conform to the prescriptions of Canon 1381 and 1382 of the Code of Canon Law, and continue to exist as a source of discord and rebellion against ecclesiastical authority and as a source of the disturbance of many consciences.
Furthermore, it is beyond understanding how a member of a religious institute, namely Father Feeney, presents himself as a "Defender of the faith," and at the same time does not hesitate to attack the catechetical instruction proposed by lawful authorites, and has not even feared to incur grave sanctions threqatened by the sacred canons because of his serious violations of his duties as a religious, a priest and an ordinary member of the Church.
Finally, it is in no wise to be tolerated that certain Catholics shall claim for themselves the right to publish a periodical, for the purpose of spreading theological doctrines, without the permission of competent Church Authority, called the "imprimatur," which is prescribed by the sacred canons.
Therefore, let them who in grave peril are ranged against the Church seriously bear in mind that after "Rome has spoken" they cannot be excused even by reasons of good faith. Certainly, their bond and duty of obedience toward the Church is much graver than that of those who as yet are related to the Church "only by an unconscious desire." Let them realize that they are children of the Church, lovingly nourished by her with the milk of doctrine and the sacraments, and hence, having heard the clear voice of their Mother, they cannot be excused from culpable ignorance, and therefore to them applies without any restriction that principle: submission to the Catholic Church and to the Sovereign Pontiff is required as necessary for salvation.
In sending this letter, I declare my profound esteem, and remain
Your Excellency's most devoted
F. Cardinal Marchetti-Selvaggiani
-
Feeney was condemned by the Holy Office. This means nothing.
Heliocentrists were condemned by the Holy Office. And that meant nothing.
-
Isn't the usual saying, all who were outside the ark perished. When that's said it's not merely meant the body, but also the soul.
I don't believe it is referring to their souls perishing, as St. Peter says that they went to the Limbo of the Fathers (1 Peter 3:18-20):
[18] Because Christ also died once for our sins, the just for the unjust: that he might offer us to God, being put to death indeed in the flesh, but enlivened in the spirit, [19] In which also coming he preached to those spirits that were in prison: [20] Which had been some time incredulous, when they waited for the patience of God in the days of Noe, when the ark was a building: wherein a few, that is, eight souls, were saved by water.
So at least some of those who perished bodily in the Flood were saved by Christ.
-
I have this desire to preach to everyone I see about the true catholic religion, vatican II, and sedevacantism.
Right now I am unemployed, but this desire could get me fired in the workplace. For example, lets say I am in the corporate world and my boss is a contracepting protestant heretic like the majority of america. What if I told him one day, "hey Boss, I like you as a person but I gotta tell you something for your own good: you are in a false religion and you are on the road to hell."
If I said that I would get fired ASAP and I could never keep a job in this economy. So what am I supposed to do, keep my mouth shut and hide from the truth??
There might be situations where you are obliged not to speak the truth but to stay quiet. Even Jesus had to hold back the full truth with the Apostles. If He flat-out and right-off-the-bat said "I am going to be crucified," all the Apostles probably would have deserted Him before His public ministry began. It wasn't until later in the Gospel of John that they were ready to hear the full truth.
I think the solution is to solely work with Catholics. We're commanded not to "bear the yoke with unbelievers" (2 Corinthians 6:14). I have tried collaborating with fellow Catholics in starting up businesses, but unfortunately there is a lot of reluctance to doing this. Hence, I am self-employed. We Catholics really need to abandon usury-powered Corporate America and setup our own alternate economy.
Fortes in fide.
-
This isn't even about "Feeneyism" per se. OP described people committing mortal sin. Yes, they would be lost if they died in that state. Yes, >90% of all the people in the world right now are likely not in a state of grace. That has absolutely nothing to do with Father Feeney. Nor does the fact that Father Feeney had a "narrow" view of EENS change the fact that these people are in a state of mortal sin. Stop blaming every darn thing in the world on Father Feeney.
OP and several other posters on this thread reveal once again that EENS-rejection comes from a place of emotion rather than from theology. Yes, it's very sad that fornicators go to hell (if they don't repent). But are we to doubt that now as well just because it's sad?
-
Feeney puts people who have a supernatural Faith and are not guilty of mortal sin in Hell. That could be a pretty sizable number of people.
-
Why are we reviving a five year old topic started by a banned member?
-
Feeney puts people who have a supernatural Faith and are not guilty of mortal sin in Hell. That could be a pretty sizable number of people.
Father Feeney doesn't put anyone anywhere, retard. Some of us believe the dogma taught by Trent that people cannot have supernatural faith without the Sacrament of Baptism. In the Rite itself, the one about to be baptized asks the Church for faith. Father Feeney believes that no one who is in a state of grace (justification) will not be provided the Sacrament of Baptism for their salvation. You make one calumny after another both against Father Feeney and against others. You have yet to apologize for and retract the mortal-sin calumnies you made against me on this forum.
-
His theology does. Please don't cry. Go study Catholicism.
-
Why are we reviving a five year old topic started by a banned member?
Good question. Germinia might know.
-
His theology does. Please don't cry. Go study Catholicism.
No, it doesn't. You're a liar and a slanderer. Father Feeney explicitly rejected the notion that anyone can die in a state of grace and be lost. He believed that God would provide the Sacrament to anyone so that this scenario can never happen. St. Augustine believed and taught the exact same thing.
-
Give me some substance instead of what you prefer to believe.
-
Give me some substance instead of what you prefer to believe.
People have quoted Father Feeney himself on this subject dozens of times, you lying reprobate.
-
Feeney taught the novel teaching that their is no salvation apart from water.
-
Feeney taught the novel teaching that their is no salvation apart from water.
I'm not talking about that. Nice diversion tactic ... as usual for you. I'm talking about your slander that Father Feeney says that people in a state of grace can go to hell.
-
Feeney taught the novel teaching that their is no salvation apart from water.
And you call the dogma of Trent a "novel teaching". Your audacious depravity knows no bounds.
-
You put words in my mouth and call me names again.
-
Feeney puts people who have a supernatural Faith and are not guilty of mortal sin in Hell.
-
This isn't even about "Feeneyism" per se. OP described people committing mortal sin. Yes, they would be lost if they died in that state. Yes, >90% of all the people in the world right now are likely not in a state of grace. That has absolutely nothing to do with Father Feeney. Nor does the fact that Father Feeney had a "narrow" view of EENS change the fact that these people are in a state of mortal sin. Stop blaming every darn thing in the world on Father Feeney.
OP and several other posters on this thread reveal once again that EENS-rejection comes from a place of emotion rather than from theology. Yes, it's very sad that fornicators go to hell (if they don't repent). But are we to doubt that now as well just because it's sad?
Very well said, it is a red herring to direct this thread to the topic of Fr Feeney - some of our forum member seem to have some sort of obsession about him. The only thing I would disagree is that the OP does not reject EENS, he clearly holds (or held to, its been 5 years) to strict EENS, he just struggled with the thought that this means that majority of people alive are on the way to hell.
Whether one is a "Feeneyite", "BoDer-for-catechumens" or "Cushingite", it has to be recognized that very few people these days are in the state of grace. Majority are unbelievers (by definition cannot be in the state of grace), heretics or lapsed Catholics.
I honestly sympathize with the OP - I also struggle with these thoughts, and I hold to EENS. However, he said nothing about prayer, which I think is highly underestimated these days, even among faithful Catholics. Yes, you can't evangelize everyone, but you can pray for many people who otherwie you can't reach. Our Lady of Fatima said that many souls go to hell because no one prays for them. Sacred Scripture is filled with passages saying about power of prayer, just to quote one out of many:
James 5:16 Confess therefore your sins one to another: and pray one for another, that you may be saved. For the continual prayer of a just man availeth much.
Do your best to share the Catholic faith with other people, and pray for those you can't reach. Not only for family, friends and relatives, but everyone you can think of. Pray for the strangers who pass you by at the street, if you are on a bus say a prayer for other passangers and bus driver, if you are watching a soccer game, say a prayer for the players and fans, etc. etc. We never know who will be saved due to these prayers, for some they might be crucial, especially in this pagan world where the Gospel is hardly being preached.
-
Should we really debate whether people who die guilty of mortal sin or not can be saved?
I say they can't. Anyone disagree?
-
I never said that OP rejected EENS, Arvinger, just that the content of the post reveals the place from which EENS-rejection comes ... the emotions. I usually choose my words carefully. He stated that he was struggling with it because of these emotional reasons. But emotion does not equal theology.
-
I accept it 100% but its still hard and brings me a lot of despair considering that 100% of my old "friends" are not traditional catholics.
It seemed the OP was under the impression that only Traditional Catholics can be saved. It does not seem he was despairing only for those in mortal sin.
My point that a significant number of people are considered damned in regards to the Feeney invention of "No Salvation Apart from Water" even if they do not die guilty of mortal sin but in a state of sanctifying grace is a legitimate one.
He went against what the Church taught and causes great chaos and dissension 'til this day.
We all agree with the Church that no one who dies guilty of mortal sin can be saved. But some who post here disagree with the Church that non-members who can be saved within the Church.
All that being said it is quite true that very few people appear to be in a state of sanctifying grace and that certainly can be depressing.
-
I never said that OP rejected EENS, Arvinger, just that the content of the post reveals the place from which EENS-rejection comes ... the emotions. I usually choose my words carefully. He stated that he was struggling with it because of these emotional reasons. But emotion does not equal theology.
Well, it looks like he was able to keep his emotion apart from his theology. Unfortunately, as you correctly point out, most of the "Cushingites" can't do this, which results in their belief of salvation of people in false religion, salvation without faith in Christ and the Trinity, salvation without sacraments etc. One of the sedevacantist priests said he "refues to believe that hell is their [non-Catholics of good faith] eternal destiny".
-
Feeney invention of "No Salvation Apart from Water" even if they do not die guilty of mortal sin but in a state of sanctifying grace is a legitimate one.
So you repeat your slander against Father Feeney and also continue to heretically state that salvation can be had without the Sacrament of Baptism (the matter of which is water).
Even in the case of BoD (if you believe it in the Thomistic sense, vs. your heretical view), people receive the Sacrament in voto and are never saved without the Sacrament, which by definition entails matter and form(water). So people are never saved without the water of Baptism. While it's true that no water is poured physically onto their heads, your formulation of being saved "apart from water" is patently heretical. You need to rephrase that to say that people can be saved without water actually being poured onto their heads. To state that people are saved apart from water is to reject the necessity of the SACRAMENT of Baptism for salvation (as dogmatically defined by Trent).
-
No Salvation Apart From Water is a new dogma Feeney invented and the disobedient prelate is the cause of great chaos even until this day.
-
I feel similar to how the OP felt. I think nearly everyone I know is going to hell and when I think about it it makes me sad. I was going to make a longer post with details of how I felt and believed but after I typed it I thought it would cause controversy so I decided not to post it.
-
No Salvation Apart From Water is a new dogma Feeney invented and the disobedient prelate is the cause of great chaos even until this day.
Such a nitwit as you.
What chaos is caused by preaching that the sacraments are absolutely necessary for salvation? What is the danger of preaching that outside the Church there is no salvation? You act like it's a heresy to preach the Catholic faith.
So spill the beans already and have it over with.
What chaos is caused by preaching that the sacraments are absolutely necessary for salvation? What is the danger of preaching that outside the Church there is no salvation? Who gets scandalized and how?
-
I feel similar to how the OP felt. I think nearly everyone I know is going to hell and when I think about it it makes me sad. I was going to make a longer post with details of how I felt and believed but after I typed it I thought it would cause controversy so I decided not to post it.
It is quite sad. Hopefully in some instances the "Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do." will come into play.
Hopefully there are some sincere people out their with a supernatural Faith who really will to do God's will and love Him more than anything else. Hopefully some people who commit mortal sins in the objective realm are ignorant of this fact through no fault of their own.
-
It is quite sad. Hopefully in some instances the "Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do." will come into play.
Hopefully there are some sincere people out their with a supernatural Faith who really will to do God's will and love Him more than anything else. Hopefully some people who commit mortal sins in the objective realm are ignorant of this fact through no fault of their own.
One thing I do is count the number of traditional Catholics in my city and think, that is the amount of people in my city who have a good chance to be saved. So in my city there are maybe a thousand traditional Catholics (based on Mass attendance) so that means about one in every five thousand people or so has a good chance to be saved.
(Not counting those who die before the use of reason)
-
It is quite sad. Hopefully in some instances the "Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do." will come into play.
Hopefully there are some sincere people out their with a supernatural Faith who really will to do God's will and love Him more than anything else. Hopefully some people who commit mortal sins in the objective realm are ignorant of this fact through no fault of their own.
One thing I do is count the number of traditional Catholics in my city and think, that is the amount of people in my city who have a good chance to be saved. So in my city there are maybe a thousand traditional Catholics (based on Mass attendance) so that means about one in every five thousand people or so has a good chance to be saved.
(Not counting those who die before the use of reason)
Right. Only true Catholics have a good chance to be saved and many of us are in trouble. If many of us saw our souls as God sees them we might die of fright. It is a scary thing to consider.
Many people also know when they commit a mortal sin even if in their mind they think of it as "doing something wrong". They feel the guilt pang the first time they do it as God has written the law on our hearts. Many people claim to love our Lord but do not and will not be saved.
Sadly there are some who partake of the outer bonds of dis-unity with heretical Church's whose lives appear to put some traditional Catholics to shame whether they partake of the inner bonds of unity within the Mystical Body of Christ or not. Despite the fact that they could be within the Church by desire because of a supernatural Faith and perfect charity it appears to be far more likely, generally speaking that many or most of them could in regards to their apparent charity towards one another have only a natural charity not rooted in the love of God above all things.
There are others who grew up Catholic and by all appearances have rejected the Faith such as Mother Theresa and all the false Popes and they are in much worse shape than those, who through no fault of their own, never had the Faith to begin with. It is said to think that by all appearances that Mother Theresa is damned as in the natural realm she put most, if not all to us to shame in regards to all the natural good she did. But that is the reality of it.
-
I should say, lest some think I am pessimistic, that I do beleive God will save some who are not traditional Catholics by conversion and repentance but I think this would be extraordinary and that those so saved are not saved in the normal way as traditional Catholics would be. So they do not have a good chance of being saved though they might get "lucky."
-
I should say, lest some think I am pessimistic, that I do beleive God will save some who are not traditional Catholics by conversion and repentance but I think this would be extraordinary and that those so saved are not saved in the normal way as traditional Catholics would be. So they do not have a good chance of being saved though they might get "lucky."
As Pius XII said they "cannot be secure about their salvation". This is because they do not have an infallible Church guiding them in truth or the Sacraments or the disciplinary guide of Catholic Church to help them along the way of salvation. Those within the Church by an effective desire may lose the Faith and or die in a state of Mortal sin.
Even members within the Church are without a visible shepherd having to depend on themselves or the traditional clergy in regards to controversial issues (settled - EENS/BOD and unsettled (Pope, una cuм etc.). Some do not have access to the Sacraments or deprive themselves of them because of the current state of the Church.
-
I should say, lest some think I am pessimistic, that I do beleive God will save some who are not traditional Catholics by conversion and repentance but I think this would be extraordinary and that those so saved are not saved in the normal way as traditional Catholics would be. So they do not have a good chance of being saved though they might get "lucky."
I'm actually more optimistic. I am convinced that large numbers of people in the Novus Ordo establishment still formally possess the Catholic faith ... even if they are in material error about some things due to the Vatican II confusion. By large numbers, I don't mean a large percentage ... perhaps 10% or so. But those are huge numbers compared to the total number of Traditional Catholics out there.
-
As Pius XII said they "cannot be secure about their salvation".
Stop spewing this garbage every chance you have. Pius XII did not thereby mean that they had any chance of salvation IN THEIR CURRENT STATE. Outside the Church, there is "ABSOLUTELY NO" salvation, not just a lower likelihood.
-
I'm actually more optimistic. I am convinced that large numbers of people in the Novus Ordo establishment still formally possess the Catholic faith ... even if they are in material error about some things due to the Vatican II confusion. By large numbers, I don't mean a large percentage ... perhaps 10% or so. But those are huge numbers compared to the total number of Traditional Catholics out there.
I hope you are right. If you are and ten percent of the Novus Ordo followers still have the faith, then there are a hundred million people with the faith. That would be wonderful.
-
Right. Only true Catholics have a good chance to be saved and many of us are in trouble.
Only true Catholics have any chance to be saved. Those who die as non-Catholics cannot be saved.
-
I should say, lest some think I am pessimistic, that I do beleive God will save some who are not traditional Catholics by conversion and repentance but I think this would be extraordinary and that those so saved are not saved in the normal way as traditional Catholics would be. So they do not have a good chance of being saved though they might get "lucky."
Someone is down-thumbing everyone that does not agree with 40's invented novelty so I gave you an upthumb.
-
Right. Only true Catholics have a good chance to be saved and many of us are in trouble.
Only true Catholics have any chance to be saved. Those who die as non-Catholics cannot be saved.
That would be true were it not false.
-
I'm actually more optimistic. I am convinced that large numbers of people in the Novus Ordo establishment still formally possess the Catholic faith ... even if they are in material error about some things due to the Vatican II confusion. By large numbers, I don't mean a large percentage ... perhaps 10% or so. But those are huge numbers compared to the total number of Traditional Catholics out there.
I hope you are right. If you are and ten percent of the Novus Ordo followers still have the faith, then there are a hundred million people with the faith. That would be wonderful.
Yes with the increase of confusion there is an increase of mercy. But there is still a lot of willful blindness out there along with legitimate ignorance. So many stay in the NO for convenience and will not look at tradition for fear of having to change. Others commit sins of fornication and will not look for the truth for fear of having to change. These will be damned.
-
Right. Only true Catholics have a good chance to be saved and many of us are in trouble.
Only true Catholics have any chance to be saved. Those who die as non-Catholics cannot be saved.
That would be true were it not false.
Blatant heretical denial of EENS. It doesn't get any clearer than that.
-
Yes with the increase of confusion there is an increase of mercy.
It's not about mercy. It's about the fact that one can have formal Catholic faith while still being in material error.
-
Others commit sins of fornication and will not look for the truth for fear of having to change. These will be damned.
And you talk about Father Feeney putting people in Hell? Those tied down due to sins of the flesh still have time to convert before they die.
-
Can you tell us about all the traditional bishops you claim to know and mock? :roll-laugh1:
-
Blatant heretical denial of EENS. It doesn't get any clearer than that.
You either have no idea what you are talking about or you willing embrace heresy.
-
Blatant heretical denial of EENS. It doesn't get any clearer than that.
You either have no idea what you are talking about or you willing embrace heresy.
You have just delcared it to be "false" that only Catholics can be saved.
-
Can you tell us about all the traditional bishops you claim to know and mock? :roll-laugh1:
You're the only one I "mock", heretical reprobate.
-
You respond like the emotional she-man type I spoke about earlier. Does it anger you that I do not allow you to get with your heresies?
Please don't cry anymore but show us something from a reliable source. [That means - not Ladislaus]
-
Blatant heretical denial of EENS. It doesn't get any clearer than that.
You either have no idea what you are talking about or you willing embrace heresy.
You have just delcared it to be "false" that only Catholics can be saved.
-
You respond like the emotional she-man type I spoke about earlier.
Says the hypocrite who's always whining like a girl about "name-calling".
Does it anger you that I do not allow you to get with your heresies?
Says the heretic.
Please don't cry anymore but show us something from a reliable source. [That means - not Ladislaus]
You are not familiar with the dogmatic definitions regarding EENS, which state that only Catholics can be saved?
-
Look he did it again. You are fun to play with. :laugh1:
-
Look he did it again. You are fun to play with. :laugh1:
You certainly enjoy playing with dogmas ... at risk of your own soul.
-
The professional she-man lives.
-
Right. Only true Catholics have a good chance to be saved and many of us are in trouble.
Only true Catholics have any chance to be saved. Those who die as non-Catholics cannot be saved.
That would be true were it not false.
You have just denied the Athanasian Creed:
"Whosoever will be saved, before all things it is necessary that he hold the Catholic Faith. Which Faith except everyone do keep whole and undefiled, without doubt he shall perish everlastingly."
Every single person who dies without the Catholic faith cannot be saved and without a doubt will go to hell, no exceptions are made. The Church has dogmatically defined that only Catholics can be saved - you deny that teaching, and still claim to believe in EENS...
-
You speak words but do not know what they mean. You act like Popes contradict each other when they do not. Please learn before you teach.
-
You speak words but do not know what they mean. You act like Popes contradict each other when they do not. Please learn before you teach.
There was never a contradiction between Popes, no Pope taught that non-Catholics can be saved, they all taught, like the Athanasian Creed, that only Catholics can be saved. You reject that dogma.
With your position there is no way you can affirm the Athanasian Creed without twisting it.
-
Never pretend that you know more than the Church.
-
Never pretend that you know more than the Church.
I just quoted the infallible teaching of the Church that non-Catholics cannot be saved, which you publicly reject - that is all I did.
-
LoE is a big adherent to EENS, as long as you agree that it means what the Novus Ordo definition is...... "Those who, through no fault of their own, do not know the Gospel of Christ or his Church, but who nevertheless seek God with a sincere heart, and, moved by grace, try in their actions to do his will as they know it through the dictates of their conscience - those too may achieve eternal salvation."
-
I beg you for your own sake don't fall into the trap Ladislaus and Stubborn have fallen into. The pit Doctor against Doctor and Pope against Pope. This is a trick of the devil.
-
I beg you for your own sake don't fall into the trap Ladislaus and Stubborn have fallen into. The pit Doctor against Doctor and Pope against Pope. This is a trick of the devil.
You repeat that like a broken record. The problem for you is that no Pope taught that non-Catholics can be saved, they all affirmed what the Athanasian Creed teaches and what I affirm - those who die as non-Catholics cannot be saved. Evidently you can't touch the Athanasian Creed with a ten foot pole, because it refutes your heresies. It is you who pit Suprema Haec Sacra against unanimous teaching of the Fathers and the dogmatic teaching of the Magisterium that non-Catholics cannot be saved.
Now please repeat loudly after the Athanasian Creed: "Whosoever will be saved, before all things it is necessary that he hold the Catholic Faith. Which Faith except everyone do keep whole and undefiled, without doubt he shall perish everlastingly."
Oh, wait, that's not what you believe...
-
I don't want you to be outside the Church at the moment of death for rejecting Church teaching and teaching errors.
-
I beg you for your own sake don't fall into the trap Ladislaus and Stubborn have fallen into. The pit Doctor against Doctor and Pope against Pope. This is a trick of the devil.
You repeat that like a broken record.
I see that you're getting to know this clown.
-
I don't want you to be outside the Church at the moment of death for rejecting Church teaching and teaching errors.
So now you declare it heresy that puts one outside the Church to affirm that only those who hold the Catholic faith can be saved. You are an abomination and an anathema.
:heretic:
-
Are you crying again? Get something for those raging hormones.
-
Are you crying again? Get something for those raging hormones.
I must say, your being raised in the anti-Church shines through when you are pegged red handed.
-
Are you crying again? Get something for those raging hormones.
:sleep:
-
Ladiislas: For what it is worth, of all the posts, I agree with you. I read the about Fr. Feeney and I read about error/communism in the USA and in Europe and how Pius XII had little power left. I read the docuмents and Feeney saved souls in those colleges and nuns and priests came forward. Schools in the once furniture store set up to uphold the church dogmas. Fr. Feeney was a good fighter for the Faith.
Lover of Truth: Chaos or Christ?! Do you see yourself as a priest/bishop maybe god?
-
Fr. Feeney was a good fighter for the Faith.
Why yes, yes he was.
-
I think now is the time for Matthew to ban LoT (E), he essentially told someone not to post the athanasian creed and he denies it himself clearly. He is not Catholic.
-
I think now is the time for Matthew to ban LoT (E), he essentially told someone not to post the athanasian creed and he denies it himself clearly. He is not Catholic.
Show me where I denied it Alebard.
-
I think now is the time for Matthew to ban LoT (E), he essentially told someone not to post the athanasian creed and he denies it himself clearly. He is not Catholic.
Show me where I denied it Alebard.
Right here:
Only true Catholics have any chance to be saved. Those who die as non-Catholics cannot be saved.
That would be true were it not false.
By declaring that non-Catholics can be saved you directly deny the Athanasian Creed which teaches (just like all the Popes and Magisterium of the Church) that only Catholics can be saved and that no one can be saved unless he holds the Catholic faith.
-
I think now is the time for Matthew to ban LoT (E), he essentially told someone not to post the athanasian creed and he denies it himself clearly. He is not Catholic.
Show me where I denied it Alebard.
Right here:
Only true Catholics have any chance to be saved. Those who die as non-Catholics cannot be saved.
That would be true were it not false.
By declaring that non-Catholics can be saved you directly deny the Athanasian Creed which teaches (just like all the Popes and Magisterium of the Church) that only Catholics can be saved and that no one can be saved unless he holds the Catholic faith.
It is amazing how he keeps posting over and over - and over again, as you say, that the Athanasian Creed and the dogma is false, aka "That would be true were it not false." all the while promoting his errors as dogma.
He is one of the many willing victims of the false teachings of those 20th century theologians which helped pave the way for today's crisis as he spams up the place trying to convert whoever he can as he posts error as truth and truth as error.
-
At best one could argue that there are some who are not materially Catholic while being formally Catholic. While there are problems with that position, to state categorically that non-Catholics can be saved is heresy.
Similarly, to state that people can be saved without or apart from the Sacrament of Baptism is heresy. At best one could argue that people can receive the Sacrament in voto and that the Sacrament, operating through the votum, remains the instrumental cause of justification quasi-ex-opere-operato, vs. the dispositions meriting salvation ex opere operantis (Pelagian heresy).
-
I think now is the time for Matthew to ban LoT (E), he essentially told someone not to post the athanasian creed and he denies it himself clearly. He is not Catholic.
Show me where I denied it Alebard.
Right here:
Only true Catholics have any chance to be saved. Those who die as non-Catholics cannot be saved.
That would be true were it not false.
By declaring that non-Catholics can be saved you directly deny the Athanasian Creed which teaches (just like all the Popes and Magisterium of the Church) that only Catholics can be saved and that no one can be saved unless he holds the Catholic faith.
I do not deny it. I accept all the Church teaches not pitting creed against Pope as you do.
-
I think now is the time for Matthew to ban LoT (E), he essentially told someone not to post the athanasian creed and he denies it himself clearly. He is not Catholic.
Show me where I denied it Alebard.
Right here:
Only true Catholics have any chance to be saved. Those who die as non-Catholics cannot be saved.
That would be true were it not false.
By declaring that non-Catholics can be saved you directly deny the Athanasian Creed which teaches (just like all the Popes and Magisterium of the Church) that only Catholics can be saved and that no one can be saved unless he holds the Catholic faith.
I do not deny it. I accept all the Church teaches not pitting creed against Pope as you do.
Creed against which Pope? No Pope taught that non-Catholics can be saved.
-
You think that the catechisms, theologians, doctors, fathers, saints and popes contradict the creed when they do not.
-
You think that the catechisms, theologians, doctors, fathers, saints and popes contradict the creed when they do not.
Not at all, Thomistic BoD does not contradict absolute necessity of Catholic faith for salvation. No Pope taught that non-Catholics can be saved - show me one authoritative quotation, show anything substantial beyond your empty and false accusation.
-
You think that the catechisms, theologians, doctors, fathers, saints and popes contradict the creed when they do not.
Not at all, Thomistic BoD does not contradict absolute necessity of Catholic faith for salvation. No Pope taught that non-Catholics can be saved - show me one authoritative quotation, show anything substantial beyond your empty and false accusation.
He just parrots this same false accusation over and over. He hides behind quotes on BoD proper, pretending that they promote his religious indifferentism, heretical rejection of EENS, heretical rejection of the necessity of the Sacraments for salvation, Pelagianism, and heretical rejection of the necessity of Catholic faith for salvation. But none of these aforementioned sources back up his heresies, just classical/Thomistic BoD.
-
Don't cry Ladislaus. Your ignorance must be inculpable otherwise you would be outside the Church through your heresies and additionally damnable because you spread them.
-
Don't cry Ladislaus. Your ignorance must be inculpable otherwise you would be outside the Church through your heresies and additionally damnable because you spread them.
Heresy has caused you to completely lose your sanity.
-
The irony.
-
I don't want you to be outside the Church at the moment of death for rejecting Church teaching and teaching errors.
This is called projection.
This started off as a good thread, very useful to me as I sometimes struggle with a similar thing. That nearly everyone is going to hell and there is very little I can do about it.
From my point of view, those who could realistically be saved.
- validly baptised children who have yet to reach the age of reason (they are considered Catholic as baptism is the sacrament of faith)
- material heretics/schismatics NO/indulters/trads (their belief is based on what they consider to be what the Catholic Church teaches even if they are actually wrong, i think people in this group has the least possibility of being saved but since there is a distinction between formal motive then maybe they have a chance?)
- Catholics who aren't material heretics/schismatics (realistically most trads have some material heresy since we all live in the modern world)
Not sure if there is any other groups to consider. Baptised children have the greatest hope of going to heaven (guaranteed before the age of reason), good Catholics come next, then Catholics with 'material' issues.
Everyone else will be damned as there is no salvation outside the Church. As the Church is the mystical Body of Christ, which as per Pope Pius 12th teaches is those who are "baptised and profess the true faith"
-
Right now I am unemployed, but this desire could get me fired in the workplace. For example, lets say I am in the corporate world and my boss is a contracepting protestant heretic like the majority of america. What if I told him one day, "hey Boss, I like you as a person but I gotta tell you something for your own good: you are in a false religion and you are on the road to hell."
If I said that I would get fired ASAP and I could never keep a job in this economy. So what am I supposed to do, keep my mouth shut and hide from the truth??
Yes. Keep your mouth shut unless you are asked to do something immoral.
There is a time and place for everything.
-
You doubt a dogma of the Church?
There's nothing wrong with being honest about one's struggle.
-
You doubt a dogma of the Church?
Id have to see it for myself before coming to any conclusions.
So you can't state that you adhere with docility to all Dogmas of the Catholic Church?
You must see them all first, to decide for yourself if they are true?
God created us as rational beings and gave us a Catholic church that is perfectly rational.
Blind acceptance belongs to cults, not to the One True Church.
The OP is struggling and God bless him for being honest.
I pray he will find a good Trad priest.
-
I just purchased the MHFM complete $20 package with all their videos and books. One of the books is called "Outside The Catholic Church There is Absolutely No Salvation."
He makes some very interesting points. But yet I have talked to traditonal clergy and they disagree with MFHM so I really do not know who to believe.
Dimond Brothers are NOT religious brothers, nor do they have a monastary.
Canon Law: The Dimond brothers are not monks and their monastery is no monastery (9-29-16)
Many who read what is available on this site comment that while they do not agree with the position held by Michael and Peter Dimond, operators of what is known as Most Holy Family Monastery (MHFM), they often visit their site because these purported “monks” have good information. A “position,” i.e., an allowable opinion by Church standards would be one thing. But here we are dealing with heresy, and heresy condemned as such by Pope Pius XII, (Feeneyism). It is not “okay” to visit the sites of known heretics, even if they present some things that are interesting or even unique, lest we cooperate in their heresy. While sometimes it is necessary to the truth to include some of these sites in research pieces, they should always be disavowed (and are on this site) and never recommended.
Belloc’s formula for establishing the existence of heresy
Heretics are very clever. They disguise their errors by carefully weaving them into a fabric consisting mainly of truthful statements, the better to lure them in, and this is how they deceive the unwary. In the Introduction to his work, The Great Heresies, (1920s) the respected Catholic historian Hilaire Belloc provides the following components of heretical perversity. “Heresy means…the warping of a system by ‘exception’: by ‘picking out’ one part of the structure and implies that the scheme is marred by taking away one part of it, denying one part of it, and either leaving the void unfilled or filling it with some new affirmation.
“The denial of a scheme wholesale is not heresy, and has not the creative power of a heresy. It is of the essence of heresy that it leaves standing a great part of the structure it attacks. It is the taking away from the moral scheme by which we have lived of a particular part, the denial of that part and the attempt to replace it by an innovation.”
It is very tempting, when one sees that “a great part of it” is right, to then be convinced that a few little errors may not matter and these folks are not so bad after all, just misguided. But that would be a grave error in judgment. Like all Traditionalists, MHFM has “plucked” the papacy from their midst and have denied not only the papacy but also the dogma of baptism of blood and desire, following the heretic Leonard Feeney. They then pose the innovation by setting themselves up as the true authority. According to Wikipedia, (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Most_Holy_Family_Monastery (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Most_Holy_Family_Monastery)):
“Most Holy Family Monastery was founded in 1967, in Berlin, New Jersey (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berlin,_New_Jersey), by a self-proclaimed Benedictine monk named Joseph Natale (1933-1995), originally as a community for handicapped men. Natale entered the Benedictine Archabbey in Latrobe, Pennsylvania (https://www.saintvincentarchabbey.org/), in 1960 as a lay postulant (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Postulant), but left less than a year later to start his own Holy Family Monastery. According to an archivist of the Saint Vincent Archabbey (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saint_Vincent_Archabbey) in Latrobe (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Latrobe,_Pennsylvania), Natale left before taking vows; he never actually became a Benedictine monk.
“Natale died in 1995, whereupon Michael Dimond (born Frederick Dimond), who joined in 1992 at the age of 19 after converting to Catholicism four years earlier was elected the Superior. Soon after, he relocated to Granger, New York (close to Fillmore, New York (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fillmore,_New_York)), where Natale owned more than 90 acres (36 ha) of donated land.”
Canon Law contradicts MHFM and their followers
https://www.betrayedcatholics.com/canon-law-the-dimond-brothers-are-not-monks-and-their-monastery-is-no-monastery-9-29-16/
-
(https://www.iclrs.org/) (https://www.iclrs.org/app/themes/byu-iclrs-2018/images/logo.svg) International Center for Law and Religion Studies
(https://www.iclrs.org/)
Court dismisses suit seeking return of large donations to monastery
Howard Friedman, Religion Clause
In Hoyle v. Dimond (http://docs.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/new-york/nywdce/1:2008cv00347/68848/106/0.pdf), (WD NY, June 22, 2012), a New York federal district court dismissed fraud, misrepresentation, RICO, deceptive practices, false advertising and equitable claims by plaintiff Eric Hoyle who was seeking return of part or all of the over $1 million that he had donated to the Most Holy Family Monastery (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Most_Holy_Family_Monastery) (MHFM). Hoyle, who rejected his Protestant faith, became a “traditional” Catholic and joined MHFM in 2005 in part because it was consistent with his beliefs that rejected the Vatican II changes to the Catholic Church and did not recognize post-Vatican II Popes as valid. In 2007, Hoyle left MHFM and set up his own website condemning it as heretical. In his lawsuit, Hoyle asserted that MHFM had misrepresented its historical connections to the Benedictine Order, which her relied on in choosing it. The court concluded:
… [E]ach of plaintiff’s claims is based on his assertion that the defendants misrepresented their status as Benedictine monks and the affiliation of MHFM with the Order of Saint Benedict. Questions regarding the establishment of MHFM as a Benedictine community and its current identification as a “traditional” Catholic Benedictine monastery are matters of religious doctrine over which the court has no jurisdiction. Moreover, plaintiff has failed to raise a genuine issue of material fact regarding the establishment of MHFM.
-
Listen to someone who left after realizing the Dimonds are a cult.
During my 7 years (2011-2018) with MHFM, I zealously participated in the dissemination of their evangelical material. But in 2018, after several relevant pastoral, human relationship, and theological issues / questions remained unresolved / unanswered by the Dimonds, after repeatedly warning them, I became convinced that severing ties with them was legitimate, in order, and completely justified.
http://la-foi.fr/mhfm/en/index.aspx
-
I just purchased the MHFM complete $20 package with all their videos and books. One of the books is called "Outside The Catholic Church There is Absolutely No Salvation."
He makes some very interesting points. But yet I have talked to traditonal clergy and they disagree with MFHM so I really do not know who to believe.
Dimond Brothers are NOT religious brothers, nor do they have a monastary.
Canon Law: The Dimond brothers are not monks and their monastery is no monastery (9-29-16)
Many who read what is available on this site comment that while they do not agree with the position held by Michael and Peter Dimond, operators of what is known as Most Holy Family Monastery (MHFM), they often visit their site because these purported “monks” have good information. A “position,” i.e., an allowable opinion by Church standards would be one thing. But here we are dealing with heresy, and heresy condemned as such by Pope Pius XII, (Feeneyism). It is not “okay” to visit the sites of known heretics, even if they present some things that are interesting or even unique, lest we cooperate in their heresy. While sometimes it is necessary to the truth to include some of these sites in research pieces, they should always be disavowed (and are on this site) and never recommended.
Belloc’s formula for establishing the existence of heresy
Heretics are very clever. They disguise their errors by carefully weaving them into a fabric consisting mainly of truthful statements, the better to lure them in, and this is how they deceive the unwary. In the Introduction to his work, The Great Heresies, (1920s) the respected Catholic historian Hilaire Belloc provides the following components of heretical perversity. “Heresy means…the warping of a system by ‘exception’: by ‘picking out’ one part of the structure and implies that the scheme is marred by taking away one part of it, denying one part of it, and either leaving the void unfilled or filling it with some new affirmation.
“The denial of a scheme wholesale is not heresy, and has not the creative power of a heresy. It is of the essence of heresy that it leaves standing a great part of the structure it attacks. It is the taking away from the moral scheme by which we have lived of a particular part, the denial of that part and the attempt to replace it by an innovation.”
It is very tempting, when one sees that “a great part of it” is right, to then be convinced that a few little errors may not matter and these folks are not so bad after all, just misguided. But that would be a grave error in judgment. Like all Traditionalists, MHFM has “plucked” the papacy from their midst and have denied not only the papacy but also the dogma of baptism of blood and desire, following the heretic Leonard Feeney. They then pose the innovation by setting themselves up as the true authority. According to Wikipedia, (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Most_Holy_Family_Monastery (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Most_Holy_Family_Monastery)):
“Most Holy Family Monastery was founded in 1967, in Berlin, New Jersey (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berlin,_New_Jersey), by a self-proclaimed Benedictine monk named Joseph Natale (1933-1995), originally as a community for handicapped men. Natale entered the Benedictine Archabbey in Latrobe, Pennsylvania (https://www.saintvincentarchabbey.org/), in 1960 as a lay postulant (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Postulant), but left less than a year later to start his own Holy Family Monastery. According to an archivist of the Saint Vincent Archabbey (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saint_Vincent_Archabbey) in Latrobe (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Latrobe,_Pennsylvania), Natale left before taking vows; he never actually became a Benedictine monk.
“Natale died in 1995, whereupon Michael Dimond (born Frederick Dimond), who joined in 1992 at the age of 19 after converting to Catholicism four years earlier was elected the Superior. Soon after, he relocated to Granger, New York (close to Fillmore, New York (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fillmore,_New_York)), where Natale owned more than 90 acres (36 ha) of donated land.”
Canon Law contradicts MHFM and their followers
https://www.betrayedcatholics.com/canon-law-the-dimond-brothers-are-not-monks-and-their-monastery-is-no-monastery-9-29-16/
-
Dimond Brothers are NOT religious brothers, nor do they have a monastary.
Canon Law: The Dimond brothers are not monks and their monastery is no monastery (9-29-16)
That link is 100% trash and constitutes a misinterpretation of Canon Law, and we'll allow the charitable construction that it's due to their ignorance ... but in that case the poster had no business making the post. Most of those Canons refer to ecclesiastical OFFICE, not religious profession, and there are other provisions that are not possible given the Crisis (such as submission to the Roman Pontiff).
But if you look into the history of the Benedictines, they are actually TRADITIONALLY a non-centralized and non-hierarchical order, unique among religious Orders in that regard, where the individual houses actually maintain a certain amount of autonomy outside of submission to the Holy Father, which all Catholics must do anyway (as per Vatican I). If certain congregations join up or coalesce or have some working relationship, it's voluntary, and there's no Benedictine "Superior General" or any other semblance of hierarchy.
In fact during the Hoyle lawsuit, the Benedictine Mother House in Rome was consulted, and the representative reiterated the Traditional view that per the nature of the Benedictine Order anyone who professes to follow the Rule of St. Benedict can call themselves Benedictines.
Brother Joseph Natale never having formally professed does not preclude him from having started another Benedictine Congregation, and his initial intention was to found one that accommodated men with disabilities, and then later it transformed into a Traditional house after the Council began to ravage the Church. He went off to do this, in the spirit of the Benedictine Order, on his initiative and with no required formal relationship with his original monastery or permission from his "superior" at his original house. He did this during the Vatican II era and before the Modernistic "reforms" had actually made their way out to impacting the lives of average Catholics.
-
Many who read what is available on this site comment that while they do not agree with the position held by Michael and Peter Dimond, operators of what is known as Most Holy Family Monastery (MHFM), they often visit their site because these purported “monks” have good information. A “position,” i.e., an allowable opinion by Church standards would be one thing. But here we are dealing with heresy, and heresy condemned as such by Pope Pius XII, (Feeneyism). It is not “okay” to visit the sites of known heretics, even if they present some things that are interesting or even unique, lest we cooperate in their heresy. While sometimes it is necessary to the truth to include some of these sites in research pieces, they should always be disavowed (and are on this site) and never recommended.
Now we get to the real impetus for slandering/smearing the Dimond Brothers, the poster's hatred for the "heresy" of Feeneyism. Feeneyism is no heresy, and, although this took place technically during the "reign" of Roncali, the men who conducted it were in place during the time of Pius XII already, and they examined the work of Father Feeney and absolved him from any heresy. No one has ever demonstrated that believing that those who lack Sacramental Baptism could be justified but not saved is heresy, and there's no Catholic dogma or even teaching that is contradicted by that position.
Post-Tridentine theologians, including the highly-respected and approved Dominican Melchior Cano, held that infidels, for instance, could be justified but not saved, and the Council of Trent dealt with JUSTIFICATION, not salvation in the passages that the Cushingites rely on for their slander of heresy.
We have a bunch of ignorant buffoons out there hating on the Dimond Brothers largely out of hatred for Catholic EENS dogma.
Bottom line is that any Trad Catholic who holds that non-Catholics can be saved (regardless of the question regarding BoD proper) is a schismatic, since the entire Vatican II theological system, the ecclesiology, the subjectivist soteriology, they are all the logical consequences of such an ecclesiology, and you'll note that this question has nothing to do with BoD, and the only reason it factors in at all is because many EENS-haters constantly use it to deny EENS and hide behind it to justify their rejection of this thrice-defined dogma.
-
Listen to someone who left after realizing the Dimonds are a cult.
During my 7 years (2011-2018) with MHFM, I zealously participated in the dissemination of their evangelical material. But in 2018, after several relevant pastoral, human relationship, and theological issues / questions remained unresolved / unanswered by the Dimonds, after repeatedly warning them, I became convinced that severing ties with them was legitimate, in order, and completely justified.
http://la-foi.fr/mhfm/en/index.aspx
No, those are the ones people should LEAST listen to, because they are not objective, have personal contempt for the Dimond Brothers, like many EENS-haters do, and so they restor to slander and spin everything they can in a negative light against the Brothers.
Please stop spamming your slanders against the Dimond Brothers on this forum.
-
Yes. Keep your mouth shut unless you are asked to do something immoral.
There is a time and place for everything.
What's the point of addressing a post written in 2011, 14 years ago now?
I see that someone necro-bumped this thread, which had died years ago, and maybe you didn't notice, but I doubt the person is in the same state that they were in back then.
-
Young people need to realize that they need to make new friends that share the same Christian values. There are meet ups. Maybe they can create thread in members only thread to meet up after mass for a hike or other activities. Maybe game night Catholic monopoly or Catholic categories.
-
But if you look into the history of the Benedictines, they are actually TRADITIONALLY a non-centralized and non-hierarchical order, unique among religious Orders in that regard, where the individual houses actually maintain a certain amount of autonomy outside of submission to the Holy Father, which all Catholics must do anyway (as per Vatican I). If certain congregations join up or coalesce or have some working relationship, it's voluntary, and there's no Benedictine "Superior General" or any other semblance of hierarchy.
In fact during the Hoyle lawsuit, the Benedictine Mother House in Rome was consulted, and the representative reiterated the Traditional view that per the nature of the Benedictine Order anyone who professes to follow the Rule of St. Benedict can call themselves Benedictines.
Brother Joseph Natale never having formally professed does not preclude him from having started another Benedictine Congregation, and his initial intention was to found one that accommodated men with disabilities, and then later it transformed into a Traditional house after the Council began to ravage the Church. He went off to do this, in the spirit of the Benedictine Order, on his initiative and with no required formal relationship with his original monastery or permission from his "superior" at his original house. He did this during the Vatican II era and before the Modernistic "reforms" had actually made their way out to impacting the lives of average Catholics.
The fact that Benedictine Monasteries are autonomous does not mean that any lay person can start a monastery and become a monk on their own volition. Although the Benedictine order doesn't bind them to any law, they are still bound by canon law and divine law.
-
Bottom line is that any Trad Catholic who holds that non-Catholics can be saved (regardless of the question regarding BoD proper) is a schismatic, since the entire Vatican II theological system, the ecclesiology, the subjectivist soteriology, they are all the logical consequences of such an ecclesiology, and you'll note that this question has nothing to do with BoD, and the only reason it factors in at all is because many EENS-haters constantly use it to deny EENS and hide behind it to justify their rejection of this thrice-defined dogma.
As for your arguments, "transeo" (I will pass over for now).
...but even in a worst-case, it would still be better than being a Dimondite.
Specifically, even as a "schismatic" you would have a better chance of salvation than someone who follows the Dimond brothers.
Of course I'm half joking here -- strictly speaking, you aren't "more likely" to go to Hell for murder vs. sins of the flesh. They will both get the job done. I'm just making a point here.
I hope you're not defending the Dimond brothers just because they happen to agree with you on BoD, EENS, etc.
Don't forget that even a broken clock is right twice a day.
-
P.S. This has got to be the oldest CURRENTLY ACTIVE thread on CathInfo.
Started 14+ years ago, and still going?
There are ADULTS today, including on CathInfo, who hadn't lost their first tooth yet, when this thread was created!
-
P.S. This has got to be the oldest CURRENTLY ACTIVE thread on CathInfo.
Started 14+ years ago, and still going?
There are ADULTS today, including on CathInfo, who hadn't lost their first tooth yet, when this thread was created!
I notice the original poster hasn’t been active since 2012. I hope he is ok as seemed to be having quite a hard time with internal struggles.
He would be 37 now.
-
I have this desire to preach to everyone I see about the true catholic religion, vatican II, and sedevacantism.
Right now I am unemployed, but this desire could get me fired in the workplace. For example, lets say I am in the corporate world and my boss is a contracepting protestant heretic like the majority of america. What if I told him one day, "hey Boss, I like you as a person but I gotta tell you something for your own good: you are in a false religion and you are on the road to hell."
If I said that I would get fired ASAP and I could never keep a job in this economy. So what am I supposed to do, keep my mouth shut and hide from the truth??
Its so incredibly strange to me that people get offended by this kind of thing. You aren't wrong, they will, but its just foreign to me. Its my autism I guess, lol.
-
Now we get to the real impetus for slandering/smearing the Dimond Brothers, the poster's hatred for the "heresy" of Feeneyism. Feeneyism is no heresy, and, although this took place technically during the "reign" of Roncali, the men who conducted it were in place during the time of Pius XII already, and they examined the work of Father Feeney and absolved him from any heresy. No one has ever demonstrated that believing that those who lack Sacramental Baptism could be justified but not saved is heresy, and there's no Catholic dogma or even teaching that is contradicted by that position.
Post-Tridentine theologians, including the highly-respected and approved Dominican Melchior Cano, held that infidels, for instance, could be justified but not saved, and the Council of Trent dealt with JUSTIFICATION, not salvation in the passages that the Cushingites rely on for their slander of heresy.
We have a bunch of ignorant buffoons out there hating on the Dimond Brothers largely out of hatred for Catholic EENS dogma.
Bottom line is that any Trad Catholic who holds that non-Catholics can be saved (regardless of the question regarding BoD proper) is a schismatic, since the entire Vatican II theological system, the ecclesiology, the subjectivist soteriology, they are all the logical consequences of such an ecclesiology, and you'll note that this question has nothing to do with BoD, and the only reason it factors in at all is because many EENS-haters constantly use it to deny EENS and hide behind it to justify their rejection of this thrice-defined dogma.
I know I'm sort of an outsider just commenting out of academic curiosity at this point, but this was never exactly why I had a problem with them, even though I disagreed on this issue. I never had the same problems with you, or with St Benedict Center.
I think where the Dimonds get really clowny is they start condemning specific individuals, including Catholic indivduals, and if you don't agree with them on said condemnations they say you aren't Catholic either. They may have chilled out a bit lately, but there's an old video where they say a Sedevacantist priest who died is "certainly" in Hell, and they even say that you aren't a real Catholic if you disagree with them that he's in Hell!
So like, its one thing to say "All non Catholics are damned" and let the chips fall where they may (maybe so and so converted in his heart before he died, or something), its another thing to say "All non Catholics are damned, therefore so and so non Catholic is definitely in Hell) and then its *another* thing to say "all non Catholics are damned, therefore this specific Catholic individual who disagrees with me is damned" and that latter bit just seems really goofy IMO.
Also I know you can debate it, but Pius IX *really* seems to make exceptions for invincible ignorance here. I feel like if anyone said basically what Pius IX said, now, the Dimonds would condemn them as a heretic, but for some reason they don't condemn him because it doesn't fit their agenda.